The questions raised in regard to the plate with Muhammad's name did provoke response. Here are further versions of the story. My questions and finally the proof that this is a hoax will be at the end of this page.


Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 01:22:25 -0800
From: Navali


Thanks for bringing my attention to the above. It is now clear that the 
author of 'Prophet Noah (PBUH) invokes Allah with Blessed Names' from 
which you have quoted your data, has certainly made a slight but 
inadvertent mistake in his facts.

The original source - a pamphlet namely, *ELIA* - "Moarife Islam" [not in 
English] - published in December 1961, by Hakeem Syed Mahmood Gilani, the 
then professor at Osmania University, India, -  speaks about 2 different 
findings therein including:

1.	Krishna's  prayer to God through Ahli - [Ali], as per an Hindu 
magazine - 1931.
2.	His findings from some Hebrew sources re: one of the Psalms of 
David which clearly  mentioned Aillee [Ali], his epithet Hadar [sic] - 
Lion, and the Kaaba. This, we are told was in the custody of the Bishop 
of Damascus. [These words are my transliteration from the original].
3.	And the Song of Solomon - which refers mainly to Muhammad, etc. 
This is now common knowledge as you know. In fact, I can share something 
with you in this regard or direct you to a source or two on the intenet 
re: the same.

He also speaks about a  'Silver Plate of Solomon'  pp. 9-17 -  which was 
found by an army unit under the command of Major A. N. Grandel in 1916, 
with almost identical inscription as well as the plaque under question. 

On page 18 of this pamphlet he asserts, 'They also found a long 
RECTANGULAR [not square as mentioned by the other source],  wooden plate. 
The experts were surprised to observe that this particular plate 
admeasuring __14" x 10"__ [CLEARLY MARKED IN INCHES NOT knots], was in 
far better condition........'

The other details seem to be okay. By the way, in 1993, whilst in 
Karachi, Pakistan for the first time ever, I met  with a personal friend 
[and translator of 'Elia - Moarife Islam' into Urdu] of the said writer 
and he apparently convinced me of these findings. I first learnt about 
the matter under discussion from a different source altogether a couple 
of years before that. Meaning; this was/is common knowledge in India and 



Even though the above gives a better version on the size of the plate, the above is mainly adding further claims instead of giving any evidence for the claim put forward on the supposed tablet of Noah's Ark. But adding other fantastic claims each of which has no evidence to show for its veracity does nothing to strengthen the case. In the contrary. It only shows that this was only one among many incredible claims and that the source of this becomes even more dubious.

Even though we are presented with a number of further independent claims, for the time being, let us stick to the wooden plate with the name of Muhammad and supposedly originating from Noah's Ark. The truth of this claim is independent from all the other claims.

For all of these claims I would like to see some evidence before they become credible for me. Evidence means:

  • Where can these findings be seen today?,
  • Which scholarly journal are they documented in?

    Does this above pamphlet give any reference for its claims? If not, even if better written and thought out, it does not have much credibility. Is it a more clever rumor than the other version, or is there factual evidence for it?

    And Navali again: "I have just e-mailed you Boom's posting for verification purposes. So that makes 2 independent sources in this case."

    Whether they are independent is another question.

    Date:         1996/11/11
    Sender: (Net News Admin)
    Organization: Ripco, Chicago's Oldest Online Information Service
    X-Ident-Sender: boom
    Newsgroups:   alt.religion.islam
                        THE SACRED WOODEN PLATE
            The Sacred wooden plate was hanging in Noah's (A.S.) ark.  It contains 
    the five Vicegerent; Mohammed, Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain, (A.S.). Noah 
    pleaded to them for help during the great flood.
            It is written in the ancient sasmaani language.  It is read from right 
    to left.
            During the month of July, 1951 a team of Russian experts, were 
    surveying the Valley of Kaat.  Perhaps they were busy in finding out a new 
    mine.  They noticed a few pieces of rotten woods at a place.  The group 
    officer started diggin the place.  To his surprise he found heaps of woods 
    pressed there under the earth.   Experts by observing a few layers speculated 
    that these woods are extraordinary and possess obscure mystery.  They 
    excavated the place with deep interest.  They found quite a good amount of 
    woods and many other things.  They also found a long rectangular wooden 
    plate.  The experts were surprised to observe that this particular place 
    admeasuring 14" x 10", was in far better condition among other woods which 
    were on the verge of decomposition, due to aging.  After investigation at the 
    end of 1952, experts came to the conclusion that this particular place 
    belonged to the Noah Arch which had rested on the peak of Mount Calff (Judy).  
    And the plate on which a few words of some ancient language were inscribed, 
    was fixed on the Arch. 
            After it was proved that the woods found in the excavation are that of 
    the Noah's Arch, the curiosity as to what is written on the wooden plate was 
    aroused.  A board of experts was appointed by the Russian Goverment under its 
    Research Department to investigate the language of the wooden plate.  The 
    Board started its work from the 27the February, 1953.  Following were the 
    members of this board:
    1. Prof. Solonon Mascow University
    2. Prof. Ifa Han Kheeno, Lu Lu Han College China/
    3. Mr. Mishaou Lu Farug, Officer I/c fossils.
    4. Mr. Taumol Goru, Teacher, Cafezud College.
    5. Prof. De Paka, Lenin Institute.
    6. Mr. M. Ahmad Colad, Zitcomen Research Association
    7. Major cottor, Stalin College.
            So these seven experts after eight months of research came to the 
    conclusion that this plate was of the woods used in making Noah Arch and that 
    the Prophet Noah (pbuh) had put this plate on his Arch for the safety of the 
    Arch and for receiving favor of Allah (SWT).
            In the center of the plate, there is a drawing of palm shape on which 
    some words of ancient Saamaani language are written.
            Mr. N.F. Max, Expert, Ancient Languages, Britain (Manchester), has 
    translated the words written on the wooden plate, in English as follows:
    "O My God, my helper
    Keep my hand with mercy,
    and with your Holy Bodies.
    Mohamed, Alia, Shabbar, Shabbir, Fatma
    They are the Biggests and Honourable.
    The world Established for them
    Help me by their names
    You can return to Right."
            People were surprised to learn these writing.  They were surprised as 
    to how this particular plate after centuries of exposition to nature did not 
    decompose and maintained its form.  The plate is still preserved at the Centre 
    of Fossils Research, Moscow, Russia.
            If you ever have a chance to visit the Soviet Union, you would be able 
    to see the actual plate, and it will increase your faith in Ahel-al-Biet.
            The translation was documented in the following newspapers:
    1. Weekly - Mirror:  U.K., Dec. 28, 1953
    2. Star of Britain:  London, Jan., 1954
    3. Manchester Sunlight:  Manchester, Jan 23, 1954
    4. London Weekly Mirror:  Feb. 1, 1954
    5. Bathrah Najaf:  Iraq, Feb. 2, 1954
    6. Al-Huda:  Cairo, March 31, 1954
    NOTE:  This document was originally written by Dr. Alamdar H. Bader D.D.S.
    Taken from the book:  Ellia - light, knowledge, and truth; by Sheikh Ghayas 
    Uddin - honorary editor, Lahore, 10/7/69 and by Hakeen Sayed Mahmood Gailaini.

    Now, these two version about the same story do have quite a number of inconsistencies. Here my list:

                            Notable differences in the stories:
    Version 1                                 Version 2
    Valley of Kiev                            Valley of Kaat  (without explanation 
                                                      where that is supposed to be).
    Soviet archeologists are digging          Russian "experts" (what sort of experts?)
                                              supposedly looking for a new MINE 
                                              [i.e. metals or minerals, certainly not
                                               the same as archeological interest.]
    scattered pieces of ANCIENT wood          few pieces of rotten wood - certainly no
                                              reason to start digging. One can find
                                              pieces of rotting wood just about everywhere
    finding a group of stony (petrified)       heaps of woods (no mention of petrified)
    woods [a group = some, but not large
    amounts in my language]
    Finding:      a BLOCK                      a LONG rectangular PLATE
    14 knots x 10 knots (202 m x 140 m)        14" x 10" (36 cm x 25 cm)  
    absolutely impossible measurements         certainly not "long" for a wooden
            Somehow in both stories the "experts" come to the conlusion   
            that the plate/block came from Noah's Ark, but none gives 
            any reason on HOW they came to this conclusion. I am surely 
            interested in the process of reasoning of this conclusion.     
            After all, it doesn't say they found the name Noah on it or
            another sort of signature. This is for sure the most crucial
            question in the whole issue. Should the plate date from 900 A.D.
            then the whole miracle evaporates into nothing.
                                                This story takes into account that
                                                the ark was supposed to have landed
                                                on Mount Judi - but I am still 
                                                interested in the distance between
                                                Mount Judi and valley Kaaf.
    words in THE oldest language                SOME ancient language
            The lists of the seven members of the research committee differ
    Taumol Goru                                 Taumol Goru
    Major Cottor                                Major Cottor
    M. Ahmad Colad                              M. Ahmad Colad
    Ifa Han Kheeno, Lu Lu Han                   Ifa Han Kheeno
       College China
                      are the four names in common
                      but three of the names are different
                      even though the reports agree to both 
                      list seven names.
                      Given the political situation at the time
                      it also is rather unlikely that Russia will
                      enlist a Chinese scholar for investigating
                      a potentially such spectacular find. 
                          The names that are different:
    Sawlot Naoev, professor at                  Prof. Solonon, Moscow University
       Moscow University.                          same institute, different name
    Tanmova Kourov, professor of                Mr. Mishaou Lu Farug, Officer 
       Linguistics at Kevenzo College.             I/c fossils. (whatever that means)
                                                   also: Mishaou Lu sounds Chines, but 
                                                   Farug definitely is not. Very strange.
    De Racon, professor of Archeology           Prof. De Paka, Lenin Institute
       at Lenin institute.                         'P' in Roman letters looks like the
                                                   Russian 'R' which could explain the
                                                   change in name, but also suggests
                                                   incompetence or at least carelessness
                                                   of the writer.
                         Agreement on 8 month of research and the
                         conclusion that it was from Noah's ark 
                        [still no reason given for this conclusion]
    text engraved                                text written on it
    no palm shaped drawing mentioned             palm shaped drawing
    Semitic language                             Saamaani language
                                                 (never heard of this language before)
                                                 (and why would this be the language )
                                                 (of Noah??                          )
    Translator: Aief Max                         N. F. Max
    (Aief: certainly a strange name!)
    Shoppar and Shappair                         Shabbar and Shabbir
     = Hassan & Husayn                             no claim on equivalence to the 
    certainly not obvious, especially              Shia Saints.
    since they are already in a semitic 
    language. One would not expect such
    strong differences. Especially since
    "Muhammed" seems to be the same.
                     Supposed place where it can be seen:
    "Museum of Archeology",                       Centre of Fossils Research
    in Moscow, Russia,                            Moscow, Russia
                      similar, but certainly not the same name.
                            (Museum or research center?)
                      (archeology - which is about things up to maybe 10,000 years ago,
                                    dealing with traces of human history etc.  )
                      (fossils are things of pre-history, and much much older.)

    But again, the most basic question is this: If it were a true story, this is for sure an incredible find, which surely would have been documented in a scholarly archeology journal. Why are there NO references which can be checked out in this regard?

    And why are all reports without a mention that the writer actually knows anybody who has seen the plate? This is very suspicious. My invitation to bring true evidence stands. And the Qur'an says it well: "Bring your proof if you are truthful." Nothing of the proof department has been brought forward so far.

    The version 2 is in general far better written, it looks more thorough and hence more "credible". The author is more competent than the one who wrote version 1, but the lack of hard evidence is the same in both. It clearly is based on the same source though - and not 'independent evidence'.

    Now finally let us look at the hard evidence in regard to this hoax.

    Facts on the newspapers which are supposedly "documenting" this case. Friends living in Manchester found out ...

    There is no record of the "Manchester Sunlight" ever existing, according to the Central Reference Library and according to the Manchester Evening News (the major Manchester newspaper) which takes care of reference 3.

    Furthermore, there was no "Professor N.F. Max at the University of Manchester" at the time of the early 50ies. (the other version claimed this). Just the claim about N.F. Max in Manchester (outside the univerisity) is very hard to verify without any further information. The duty for evidence is on those who make these claims. Please give a citation of at least one paper written by this "specialist" to establish even so much as his existence.

    And news from London: I think another hoax may have just been "cracked". I went to the Colindale HQ of the British Library Newspapers Collection. You remember those newspapers which were listed at the bottom of the "original" Noah article - Weekly Mirror, Star of Britain, Manchester Sunlight, (London) Weekly Mirror (the same as the first) and Bathrah Najaf (Iraq) and Al-Huda (Cairo)? Well, I checked in the "Newspaper Press Directory" for the years mentioned - 1953-4 - a very thick book produced annually and listing every newspaper published in the UK and almost all others in the world - and NOT ONE of the papers was listed - i.e. they were all non-existent!!!!

    Then I checked the British Library newspaper catalogue, and just one - the (London) Weekly Mirror was listed, so I requested to be shown the 1953 - 1954 editions. Guess what. The dates did not correspond - it was published on December 26 (not 28) 1953 and 6 February (not 1) 1954. But that's not the best. It was a "ghost" newspaper, never actually distributed! What I mean is - the title "Weekly Mirror" (London) was the title of a long-since defunct paper which for copyright reasons and to prevent anyone else taking over the title the publishers, Mirror Group, produced once a week, a single page with the title "Weekly Mirror", date and a couple of paragraphs of rubbish just to keep the title in their possession. So almost certainly all those references are bogus.

    There is a remote chance that the others were newsletters, never widely circulated or registered with the British Library, but if so, why did the article appear in such spurious sources, which it would be impossible in 1997 to verify or authenticate? Why did it never reach a more "mainstream" paper? And the fact that one paper, Weekly Mirror did exist but the references were bogus makes me very suspicious that the others have any integrity at all.

    I think we have done all that is possible from our side to find if these reports are true. Anyone who continues to claim the truths of these stories has first to show something about the existence and whereabouts of these fictional papers. Or, better, to produce the plate (address of the Museum, number of the exhibition item, photograph of the plate...).

    Original version of the story
    More newsgroup postings on this issue

    Rumors and hoaxes
    Answering Islam Home Page